View full case

SUSAN LIM-LUA v. DANILO Y. LUA

FACTS:

The petitioner, Susan Lim-Lua, filed an action for the declaration of nullity of her marriage with the respondent, Danilo Y. Lua. She requested support pendente lite in the amount of P500,000.00 per month, citing the respondent's significant earnings. The trial court granted support pendente lite in the amount of P250,000.00 and ordered the respondent to pay retroactive support amounting to P1,750,000.00. Respondent filed a motion for reconsideration, arguing that petitioner is not entitled to spousal support as she does not maintain a separate dwelling from their children and the family's social and financial standing. The trial court treated the motion as a mere scrap of paper and held respondent in contempt. Respondent filed a petition for certiorari before the Court of Appeals (CA) which nullified the trial court's orders and reduced the monthly support to P115,000.00. The CA also ordered the respondent to pay the arrears and deducted the advances given to the children and petitioner. The parties did not appeal this decision of the CA.

The petitioner filed a petition for contempt of court with damages against the respondent for failing to pay the support in arrears. The respondent, in turn, filed a petition for certiorari. The Court of Appeals set aside the trial court's orders and ordered the deduction of certain expenses from the support in arrears owed to the petitioner and her children. The petitioner filed a motion for reconsideration, which was denied. Thus, the petitioner filed this petition, arguing that the Court of Appeals erred in not finding the respondent guilty of contempt and in allowing the deduction of certain expenses from the support in arrears. The main issue is whether the expenses incurred by the respondent may be deducted from the support in arrears. The petitioner argues that these expenses are not indispensable to the sustenance of the family, while the respondent contends that disallowing the deductions would result in unjust enrichment.

During the pendency of the case, the trial court and the Court of Appeals ordered the respondent to provide monthly support pendente lite amounting to P115,000.00 for the petitioner and her two children. However, the respondent argued that the amount of monthly support should be reduced. The petitioner testified that she spends P40,000.00 to P50,000.00 a month for food alone, and over P100,000.00 for other expenses, including clothing, vitamins, medicines, therapy for her scoliosis, and drivers and house helpers.

ISSUES:

  1. Whether the amount of P75,000.00 offered by the respondent as monthly support pendente lite is sufficient.

  2. Whether the deductions made by the respondent from the total amount in arrears are valid and should be allowed.

  3. Whether the expenses already incurred by the respondent should be considered as advances and deducted from the support in arrears due to the petitioner and the two children.

  4. Whether the petitioner's contribution to the joint obligation of support for their children should be considered.

  5. Whether the expenses incurred by the respondent should be credited against the accrued support pendente lite.

  6. Whether all the expenses incurred by the respondent should be allowed as deductions from the accrued support pendente lite.

  7. Whether the respondent is guilty of indirect contempt.

  8. Whether the trial court's grant of monthly support pendente lite can be reduced or offset.

RULING:

  1. The trial court, finding the amount of P75,000.00 offered by the respondent as monthly support pendente lite to be insufficient, fixed the monthly support pendente lite at P250,000.00. The Court of Appeals (CA) later reduced the amount to P115,000.00, which ruling was no longer questioned by both parties.

  2. The trial court disallowed the deductions made by the respondent from the total amount in arrears, which included car purchases, car maintenance fees, credit card statements, and other expenses. The respondent filed a motion for reconsideration, asserting that additional advances given to petitioner and the children should also be considered. However, the CA did not rule on the validity of these deductions and advances.

  3. The Court reverses the decision of the CA in part.

  4. The Court held that the expenses incurred by the respondent should be credited against the accrued support pendente lite if it can be done so without injustice to the mother.

  5. The Court held that not all the expenses incurred by the respondent should be allowed as deductions from the accrued support pendente lite. Only the expenses relating to sustenance and household expenses should be allowed as deductions.

  6. The respondent is not guilty of indirect contempt. While he ceased or suspended the giving of monthly support pendente lite, the court ruled that his act was not contumacious considering that he continued to provide for the needs of his children and believed in good faith that the trial and appellate courts would allow him to offset the substantial amounts he had spent or paid directly to his children.

  7. The trial court's grant of monthly support pendente lite can be reduced or offset. The amount of support may be reduced or increased proportionately according to the reduction or increase of the necessities of the recipient and the resources or means of the person obliged to support. The matter of increase or reduction of support should be submitted to the trial court, as the Supreme Court is not a trier of facts.

PRINCIPLES:

  • In fixing the amount of spousal support, the court considers the financial capacity of the parties, the needs of the requesting spouse, and the standard of living during the marriage.

  • Deductions made from the total amount in arrears must be supported by receipts and valid expenses.

  • The court has the discretion to disallow deductions and advances if they are not proven to be necessary or reasonable.

  • Judicial determination of support pendente lite in cases of legal separation and petitions for declaration of nullity or annulment of marriage must be guided by the rules on spousal support and child support as provided in the Rule on Provisional Orders.

  • In determining support for spouses, the court may consider factors such as the standard of living during the marriage, comparative financial resources of the spouses, needs and obligations of each spouse, and contribution of each spouse to the marriage.

  • In determining child support, the court may consider factors such as the financial resources of the parents and the child, physical and emotional health of the child, and the standard of living the child has been accustomed to.

  • The Family Court may direct the deduction of provisional support from the salary of the spouse or parent.

  • In crediting money payments or expenses against accrued support, courts may refuse to credit payments made directly to the children if such payments were made without any relation to the court decree.

  • A father, who is required by a divorce decree to make child support payments directly to the mother, cannot claim credit for payments voluntarily made directly to the children. However, special considerations of an equitable nature may justify a court in crediting such payments on his indebtedness to the mother, when that can be done without injustice to her.

  • The monthly support pendente lite granted by the trial court is intended primarily for food, household expenses, and necessary therapy sessions, and deductions should be limited to these basic needs and expenses.

  • When determining the amount of support pendente lite, the court should consider the financial resources of the father and the sustenance and basic necessities of the mother and children.

  • Only expenses relating to sustenance and household expenses should be allowed as deductions from the accrued support pendente lite. Other expenses unrelated to the judgment awarding support pendente lite should be disallowed.

  • Contempt of court is defined as a disobedience to the court by acting in opposition to its authority, justice, and dignity. To constitute contempt, the act must be done willfully and for an illegitimate or improper purpose.

  • The right to support is provisional and can be modified or altered according to the increased or decreased needs of the recipient and the means of the person obliged to support. The amount of support is subject to the final determination of the trial court.